The use of 18-fluoro-dihydroxyphenylalanine and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scanning in the assessment of metaiodobenzylguanidine-negative phaeochromocytoma

I. S. Mackenzie, M. Gurnell, K. K. Balan, H. Simpson, K. Chatterjee, M. J. Brown

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    41 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    123I-Metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-MIBG) scintigraphy scanning is commonly used in the imaging of phaeochromocytoma (and paraganglioma) to confirm the site of disease and whether any spread has occurred. However, 123I-MIBG imaging is negative in 15% of cases of benign phaeochromocytoma and around 50% of cases of malignant phaeochromocytoma. In recent years, positron emission tomography (PET) scanning using various different radiotracers has been shown to be a good alternative or supplementary investigation in phaeochromocytoma. We present the cases of four patients with symptoms and signs suggestive of phaeochromocytoma, but who had negative 123I-MIBG scans, and illustrate the usefulness of 18-fluoro-dihydroxyphenylalanine PET scanning in their assessment. In one of the patients, we illustrate how fluorodeoxyglucose PET scanning can provide useful information about the extent of malignant disease. These illustrative cases lend further support for the use of PET scanning in the assessment of phaeochromocytoma and suggest that it may have a particularly important role in the investigation of patients in whom 123I-MIBG scanning is negative.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)533-537
    Number of pages5
    JournalEuropean Journal of Endocrinology
    Volume157
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2007

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Endocrinology

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'The use of 18-fluoro-dihydroxyphenylalanine and 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scanning in the assessment of metaiodobenzylguanidine-negative phaeochromocytoma'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this